CHAPTER II.
GUNNERY--MUZZLE-LOADERS AND BREECH-LOADERS.
To the young sportsman, armed with the finest of implements, and trusting much to them for his success, it is a matter of mortification and surprise how well a bad gun will shoot in good hands; nevertheless, no true sportsman ever lived but, if he were able by any self-denial to scrape the means together, would purchase a valuable and necessarily expensive fowling-piece. Not only is a well made and handsomely finished gun safer and lighter than a cheap affair manufactured for the wholesale trade; not only does it ordinarily carry closer and recoil less; but it needs fewer repairs, lasts infinitely longer, and is always a matter of pride and delight to its owner.
Many guns of inferior workmanship throw shot as strongly as those turned out by the best makers--although this is not the fact in general--but greater weight has to be given to insure tolerable safety, and the locks, if not the barrels, are sure to give out in a few years; whereas the high-priced article will be as perfect at the end of a dozen years--which have accustomed its owner to its easy, rapid, and effective management--as it was in the beginning, and will endure until failing sight, wasting disease, or accumulating years, shall compel its transfer into younger hands.
Unless a man has continual practice, or is an excellent shot, it is a serious undertaking to change his gun and accustom himself to another, which, although apparently identical in weight and shape, will inevitably differ in some slight point that will be sufficient to destroy, for a time, accuracy in aim and prompt execution in cover. Some persons require months to acquire the effective use of a new gun under difficult circumstances; and in those dense thickets where so much of our shooting is done, and where it is by instinct founded upon long habit that the sportsman is enabled at all to kill his game, and where he cannot indulge in the deliberate care that more open shooting allows--this deficiency will be most painfully apparent. For such persons to purchase a new piece, is equivalent to throwing away the sport of an entire summer or fall, and when we consider that few of us can expect to average more than forty summers or falls, the loss of one-fortieth part of life’s enjoyment is no trivial deprivation.
A very cheap gun is dangerous; but it is not expected that any person reading these lines will trust his life with an instrument that common sense tells him is manufactured to kill at both ends. A gun of moderate price, that is, from forty to fifty dollars, is as safe as the most expensive--the iron is not so tough, but more of it is used; but in a short time the barrels will wear away; the locks, losing their original quick spring and sharp click, will become dull and weak, till they will scarcely discharge the cap; and the stock, warping with the weather, will exhibit yawning fissures between itself and the iron lock-plates or false breech.
In lightness, however, is the great superiority of the highly wrought implement; and in hard tramping through a dense swamp of a hot July day, or deep wading in a soft snipe-meadow, or in a wearisome trudge over hill and dale after November quail, a pound will make itself felt in the additional weight of the fowling-piece, and not only so, but a light gun can be handled more readily. In open shooting, especially for the wild fowl of our bays and coasts, mere weight is a positive advantage; but in the tangled thickets, where birds flash out of sight like gleams of party-colored light, and the instantaneous use of the piece can alone secure success, a light gun is an absolute necessity.
Moreover, on certain occasions, when the barrels are exposed to an extraordinary strain, when the piece built for light charges and upland shooting is used temporarily upon the larger game of the coasts or woods, and the two and a half drachms of powder and ounce of fine shot are replaced by a dozen buck-shot, or an ounce and a half of No. 3 driven by five drachms of powder--then it is pleasant to feel that the iron is of the utmost possible tenacity and the workmanship in every way faultless.
A learned dissertation on the science of gunnery is neither appropriate to the occasion nor possible to the author, and would probably prove as little entertaining as instructive to the reader. The majority of purchasers cannot form an exact opinion relative to the merits of a gun prepared with the utmost skill and ingenuity to deceive them, and must rely mainly on the word of the seller or reputation of the maker. There is something, to be sure, in the smooth working of the locks, and still more in the perfect fitting of the stock; but after all, even to the experienced sportsman, there is little difference in appearance between the Shamdamn and the purest laminated steel.
American importers have a peculiarly moral and respectable habit of vending German guns stamped with the names of English makers, and pacify their consciences with the idea that the manufactures of Germany are not inferior to those of England; but they would give more satisfaction to the public and more ease to their consciences by proving this in open contest, and establishing the reputation of the German makers, than by appropriating the names and reputations that good work has made famous. So far is this deception carried, that some houses even order from the Belgian manufacturers a certain number, nominally, of each of the leading gun-makers. It may be that there is little real difference, although on the continental guns you sometimes pay for useless ornament, money that should have been expended where it would tell, on locks and barrels; but the mode of proceeding is certainly not creditable.
In a highly finished article the locks usually work with a smooth oiliness that can be distinguished with a little practice, and are fitted with great accuracy into the stock, so that projections of wood will be left standing not thicker than a piece of blotting-paper. The barrels will be without flaw or indentation, and if looked through with the breech removed, will exhibit a perfect ring of light flowing up evenly, as they are raised or lowered. The mountings will be faultless, and the cuts in all the screw-heads will point in the same direction; the screws will work easily and yet perfectly, and the triggers and trigger-plate, which are invariably neglected in a poor gun, will be admirably finished and fitted. Examine all these particulars, but especially the last, and you can form some judgment whether the piece comes from a good maker or a spurious imitator.
The greatest attention, however, in the selection of a gun should be paid to the form of the stock and the pull of the triggers; if the former is unsuited to the shape of the purchaser, or the latter are stiff or dissimilar, the consequence will be utter failure that no amount of practice will remedy. If the purchaser’s arms and neck are long, the stock may be long and crooked; but if the contrary is the case, the stock must be short and straight.
If possible, the person intending to use a gun should select it for himself; and if it does not “come up right” the first time he brings it to his eye, he should refuse it positively. He must not allow himself to be persuaded to try it again and again; for after one or two trials he will instinctively adapt his eye to its construction, and will imagine the gun suits him--an impression that the rapid flight of the first quail he endeavors to cover will dissipate. The triggers should give back at a weight of four or five pounds; the hammers of a muzzle-loader at ten or twelve, and of a breech-loader at twelve or fourteen. For the former, the best cone is what is called the inverted, where the bore is larger at the top and receives the entire flame from the cap.
The shape of the breech for the muzzle-loader formerly gave rise to much learned disquisition and many plausible theories; but, in all probability, had no influence on the shooting, which is due mainly to the form and quality of the barrels. Joe Manton founded his fame on the idea that the lines of force, if reflected from a hollow cup, like rays of light from a reflector, would be directed parallel to one another and lengthwise of the barrel; but later experiments have tended to destroy this theory. The simple fact appears to be, that powder exerts just so much force, and, as it cannot escape sideways, it must go out at the end of the barrel; and that the shape of the breech, except so far as it may affect the rapidity of ignition, has no influence whatever.
These questions, however, are being effectually disposed of by the march of events and the general diffusion of breech-loaders; to the latter, as they are not universally known or appreciated in our country--to which, by its nature and its game, they are peculiarly adapted--the writer’s remarks will be mainly confined. Feeling entirely convinced, even from a short experience, of their superiority in most particulars, and their equality in all, he regards the consequence as inevitable that they will utterly supersede the old-fashioned fowling-piece; the few defects that were originally alleged to exist in them having been either removed or remedied, and the supply of ammunition for them in this country having become sufficient. They have won their way slowly into public favor against the interested opposition of gun-makers on one hand, and the ignorance and superstitious dread of change of gun-users on the other.
They are a French invention of forty years’ standing, and proved their superiority long ago; but prejudice was too strong for them, as it has been for many another good thing. Their merits, nevertheless, slowly conquered opposition, convinced the intelligent, and confounded the obstinate; till at last in England--the very hot-bed of prejudice and the favorite abiding-place of antiquated ideas--there are now sold fifty breech-loaders to one muzzle-loader. As they are not universally used with us, the description of them will have to be somewhat minute, and would be better understood if the reader would take the trouble to examine one for himself.
The best and most generally adopted of the various kinds is the _Lefaucheux_, or some slight modification of it; and to that the attention will be principally directed. In this gun the breech, which in the muzzle-loader screws into the barrel, is omitted, and the barrels are open at both ends; they are fastened to the stock by a pin and joint a few inches beyond the guard. When free, the muzzle hangs down, and the breech end presents itself several inches above the stock, so that the cartridge can be readily inserted; when the barrels are pressed back into their place for firing, they are caught by a bolt that can be opened or closed by a lever lying along the under part of the stock, between the guard and the joint. The false breech is flat, solid, and heavy, and completes the barrels, taking the place and performing the duty of the breech in the muzzle-loader. The hammers have a flat surface on the striking end, and the locks are back-actioned, to avoid interfering with the other mechanism.
The pin cartridge is made of paper, shaped like a short section of the barrel, with a brass capsule on one end and open at the other; it is two or three inches long, and has a pad of thick paper beneath the capsule. In this pad a hole is punched on the inside and the percussion-cap is inserted, with a brass pin resting in it and projecting above the capsule on the outside. The percussion-cap is entirely within the cartridge-case, and the brass pin passes through a hole drilled in one side of the capsule, just large enough to admit it and exclude moisture entirely. A blow on the projecting end of the pin drives the other end into the cap, and discharges the latter. The cartridge-case is prepared already capped, and is sold in England for from thirty to fifty shillings the thousand; it may be recapped by an instrument made for the purpose with a peculiar cap, and may be used, on an average, three times.
The cartridge must be loaded as the gun would be, only by the use of a short ramrod or a special loading implement; the powder is poured in, a wad placed above it, and the shot and another wad follow. The cartridge may then be trimmed down and the end bent over, so as to retain the load securely, if it is to be carried for a considerable distance; but where the shooting is from a boat or stand, the case should be left untrimmed and of full length. A chamber is cut away in the lower part of the barrel, which corresponds exactly with the cartridge-case, so that the latter fits perfectly in it; but, if there is an interval between the end of the cartridge and the shoulder in the barrel, no injury to the charge or the shooting appears to result. A small notch is cut in the upper edge of the barrel to contain the brass pin, and allow it to project so as to receive the blow from the hammer.
When the bolt is withdrawn and the barrels are allowed to fall so as to bring the open breech fairly into view, the loaded cartridge is inserted, the barrels are sprung back to their place with a sharp snap that sends them home at once, and are ready to be discharged. To allow the cartridge to be inserted, the hammers must be drawn to half or full cock; and when the trigger is pulled, they fall upon the pin, which penetrates the cap and fires the load. The entire mechanism is so simple that it can hardly become deranged, and will last as long as the barrels. The greatest care is necessary in making the chamber that receives the cartridge of a proper shape, for if this is faulty the cartridges are apt to stick after explosion.
There is no decided improvement on the original Lefaucheux model, except in the modification of the machinery, and a convenient method of separating the barrels from the stock; and no other innovation of a like character need be particularly described. The needle-gun, which is made on a somewhat similar principle, is more curious than valuable, being both dangerous and complicated, and possesses no advantages over the other pattern. In it the cartridge has a percussion-cap so disposed at its base that it is penetrated by a needle, which is projected by a spring through a hole in the lower end of the cartridge; but the composition of the cartridge, and the manner of its insertion, are altogether different from the same in the Lefaucheux gun.
According to the arrangement of some English guns, on a plan invented by Jeffries, the lever, instead of closing forward, lies under the trigger-guard, when the barrels are closed; and provision is made for tightening the bolt, in case it wears loose by long usage. This invention permits of the use of forward-action locks, and the easy separation of the barrels from the stock, and has come into vogue in England; it is undoubtedly convenient in both these particulars, and has as yet developed no corresponding drawbacks.
Personally, the writer has always preferred British to French or Belgian guns, although chance has compelled him to own as many of the latter as the former. The English gun is made for work; even when cheaply manufactured, it will be found effective where efficiency is necessary; and it is far more beautiful to the eye of a true sportsman, with its plain blued lock-plates, and total deficiency of ornament, than the Continental weapon, covered with engraving and ornamentation, but defective in some of those minutiæ that lend nothing to its beauty, but add much to its usefulness. This is particularly the case with breech-loaders, which, if not manufactured carefully, are almost useless, and which, although originally invented in France, are at this day produced in more serviceable style--unless where the highest-priced article is obtained--in England than in the country of their origin. Great discredit was brought upon breech-loaders among us at their first introduction, in consequence of the importation of inferior articles, and they still labor under the disadvantages of that failure, although rapidly overcoming all objections.
There are a few implements that are necessary to the use of a breech-loader, which are much simpler than they at first appear. To load the cartridge is required either a short ramrod and a machine for turning over the edges of the case upon the wad, to retain it in its place, or an apparatus, also invented by Jeffries, that combines all the requisites for loading, and by the aid of which a hundred cartridges can be loaded in an hour. As the case can be used several times, and the cap, which is of a peculiar size, has to be placed in its exact position to receive the pin, a capper invented for the purpose is employed, by which the cap is inserted, and the pin pressed into it without the least difficulty; a pair of tweezers are used to withdraw the pin after a discharge, in order to free the old cap and make room for the new, and a large gimlet will be found useful for extracting any discharged caps that may happen to stick.
A cleaning-apparatus is also occasionally used, consisting of a brush at one end of a string and a small weight at the other; the weight is dropped through the open barrel and the brush drawn after it; but, as the gun may be fired ten times as often as a muzzle-loader without fouling, a plain rag and cleaning-rod will answer. Cartridge-cases, of course, cannot be obtained like powder and shot at every country store, and to obviate the danger of finding oneself, after extraordinary good-luck with a gun, without the means of firing it, it is well to carry a couple of brass cases, which can be used with a common French cap, and reloaded indefinitely almost as quickly as a muzzle-loader.
The sportsman, by the aid of these implements and a couple of scoops with handles for powder and shot, recaps the cartridges which have been discharged, loads them as he would a gun, only much more rapidly, and lays them aside for future use. In the field, he carries them in a leather case, or, which is the preferable plan, in a belt round the waist, or in his pockets, being able to store in the pockets of his vest alone at least twenty. The English sportsmen carry them loose in the pockets of their shooting-coats; but a belt is convenient and commodious, holding from thirty to fifty, and distributes the weight pleasantly. Where the shooting is to be done from a boat or stand, of course they will be kept in an ammunition-box, without having their edges turned over, as there will be nothing to loosen the wads.
The reader may naturally suppose that there is risk in carrying a number of loaded cartridges about the person; but in this he is entirely mistaken. In the first place, the difficulty of discharging a cartridge, except in the gun, is surprising; no pressure will explode the cap, and no ordinary blow, unless the cartridge is retained in a fixed position; and if one falls, the weight of the shot compels it inevitably to fall on the end: but in case these difficulties are overcome, the result is merely the discharge of a large fire-cracker.
The writer instituted a number of experiments, and having succeeded, after many trials, in setting off the cartridge, found that the powder burst the paper, but failed to drive the wad out of the case. This was tried with cartridges in all positions, horizontal and perpendicular, but produced invariably the same result, with unimportant modifications; and it was further ascertained that the fire from one would not communicate to another. So that, if a cartridge does explode accidentally, it may scorch the clothes or even burn the person slightly, but can inflict no serious injury. These remarks, however, do not apply to the brass cartridge-cases, which must be handled more carefully. The common paper-cases may therefore be carried with perfect impunity, and transported, if carefully packed, without risk.
A more curious idea--for the dread of danger from the loaded cartridge is natural--prevailed at one time, that the barrels were weakened because they were open behind, instead of being closed by the breech-screw; as if a cylinder would be rendered more cohesive by screwing another piece of metal into one end. In fact, if the breech-screw has any effect whatever upon the strength of the gun, its presence is probably an injury. The charge, it will be observed, presses against the shot on one side and the false breech on the other, and would not be retained any more securely by the addition of a breech-screw, which tends to separate instead of closing the barrel. So, also, it must be borne in mind there is no strain worth mentioning on the hinge-bolt, and no danger of the barrels blowing away with the charge; while the disposal of the metal at the false breech, and the omission of the ramrod, tends to make the gun light at the muzzle--a great advantage in snap-shooting.
There is absolutely no escape of gas at the break-off; none can escape unless the brass capsule, which closes the joint hermetically, can be driven out, and this is a sheer impossibility. The gas cannot penetrate the paper of the cartridge, and if it bursts the latter, still cannot escape except through the brass; and although the least perceptible amount may come out alongside of the pin, it is scarcely traceable, and nothing like what is lost at the percussion-cap in the common gun. These cartridges are wonderfully close, as the reader may conclude when he is informed that a loaded breech-loader, left entirely under water for fifteen minutes, was discharged as promptly as though it had never been wet; while a muzzle-loader, that had not been half so long exposed, would not go at all, and required an hour’s cleaning. In fact, the breech-loader is entirely impervious to any ordinary wetting, will not fail in the worst rain, and the average number of miss-fires, in well made cartridges, is one in a thousand.
In the handling of this gun there is one peculiarity: the pins rise from the middle of the cartridge, and not at one side, like the ordinary cones, thus bringing the hammers closer together. To the beginner this may appear awkward, but is no real disadvantage. It would seem also desirable to use more powder with a breech-loader, although this is not necessary to so great an extent as it was formerly; but, on the other hand, the weight at the breech appears either to diminish the recoil or reduce its effects on the shooter; as the testimony of persons using breech-loaders is unanimous that the recoil is less perceptible than with muzzle-loaders, although the scales have refused to verify their impression.
One immense advantage of the breech-loader is its safety in loading, especially in a confined position, as on a boat or in a battery. Whereas, in the muzzle-loader, immediately after the discharge, while the smoke is still pouring from the barrel, and while the fire may be smouldering invisible below, the sportsman deliberately pours in a fresh charge of powder, holding his hand and the entire flask over the muzzle, endangering his life, and incurring injury far more frequently than most persons suppose; with the breech-loader, the barrels are opened and fall into such a position that no discharge can take place, and never point towards the person of their owner.
Several of the writer’s friends have been maimed for life by the premature discharge of a load in the muzzle-loader from a spark remaining in the barrel; the risk connected with it has always seemed very great; and even with the patent flasks, which are hardly practical inventions, more or less unavoidable. This danger is entirely obviated by the breech-loader, which cannot go off until the barrels are restored to position after the charges are inserted; cannot leave hidden sparks to imperil the owner’s life or limb; never expose the hand over the loaded barrel, that may have been left at half-cock, if the sportsman is liable to thoughtlessness or over-excitement; and which can be loaded without difficulty in the most confined position. So, not only do we have rapidity, but entire safety in loading.
The objections, however, urged against breech-loaders have not been few, and, if well founded, forbid the use of the gun; if, as has been said, the target is not so good, nor the shot sent with as much force, the requisites of a first-class sporting implement are wanting. These charges, freely advanced, have been sustained in a measure by the wretched performance of poor guns, but were early been brought to the only true test--actual experience, under equal conditions; and by this test have been so utterly annihilated that their discussion is only necessary on account of popular ignorance of the experiments. When breech-loaders first came prominently before the English public, their supposed merits and demerits were discussed in the sporting papers in an animated and violent manner; and in order to settle the questions at issue, the editor of the London _Field_ determined to have an open trial, where the breech-loaders and muzzle-loaders could be fairly matched against one another. The contests took place in 1858 and 1859, and being carefully conducted, settled the dispute for the time being, and, even before the latest improvements, established more fully the superiority of the breech-loader. The best guns and gun-makers of England were represented; and in spite of occasional variation and accidental luck--as in the pattern of the first muzzle-loader--the prejudices against the modern arm were so entirely dissipated that the old-fashioned guns are at present rarely sold.
Since that trial considerable advance has been made in the minutiæ of the manufacture; and now it is the general impression of those acquainted with the arm, that the breech-loader, with a slight additional increase of powder, shoots both stronger and closer than its rival. In the pigeon-matches, with scarcely an exception, held both in this country, of late years, as well as in Great Britain, where it is to be supposed that the best implements the country could furnish would be used, and where some of the shooting was done at thirty yards, the favorite and most successful weapons have been breech-loaders. With all allowance for the quality of the marksman, the quality of the gun that wins a match at English “blue-rocks” must unquestionably be good; and this, the universal experience of those matter-of-fact John Bulls, who test everything by success, has entirely confirmed.
A trial of guns was made in 1859, and the results were published in tabular form in _The Shot-Gun and Sporting Rifle_, by Stonehenge, p. 304. The targets were made of double bag-cap paper, 90 lbs. to the ream, circular, thirty inches in diameter, with a centre of twelve inches square, and were nailed against a smooth surface of deal boards. The centres were composed of forty thicknesses for forty yards, and twenty for sixty yards, and weighed eighteen and nine ounces respectively, with such slight variation as will always occur in brown paper. The powder was Laurence’s No. 2, the shot No. 6, containing 290 pellets to the ounce, and the charges were weighed in every instance.
TABLES OF THE FIELD TRIAL.
+----+-------+------+-------+------+> | | | | | | | |Length |Weight|Charge |Charge| | | of | of | of | of | Kind of Gun. |Bore|Barrel.| Gun. |Powder.|Shot. | --------------+----+-------+------+-------+------+> | | | lb. | | | | | in. | oz. | drs. | oz. | --------------+----+-------+------+-------+------+> Muzzle-loader | 12 | 30 | 6.11 | 2-3/4 |1-1/4 | | | | | | | " | 12 | 30 | 7.6 | 2-3/4 |1-1/4 | " | 12 | 29-1/2| 6.8 | 2-3/4 |1-1/4 | Breech-loader | 12 | 30 | 7.8 | 3 |1-1/4 | " | 12 | 30 | 7.2 | 3 |1-1/4 | " | 12 | 30 | 7.0 | 3 |1-1/4 | Muzzle-loader | 13 | 30 | 7.0 | 2-3/4 |1-1/4 | Breech-loader | 13 | 29 | 6.10 | 3 |1-1/8 | Muzzle-loader | 13 | 28 | 6.14 | 2-3/4 |1-1/8 | | | | | | | " | 12 | 29-1/2| 6.10 | 2-1/2 |1-3/16| Breech-loader | 16 | 30 | 7.4 | 3 |1-1/4 | " | 16 | 28 | 7.4 | 2-3/4 |1 | " | 13 | 28-1/2| 7.4 | 3 |1-1/3 | " | 12 | 31 | 7.8 | 3 |1-1/3 | " | 12 | 30 | 7.4 | 3 |1-1/4 | " | 13 | 28 | 5.4 | 3 |1 | " | 14 | 29-1/2| 7.8 | 3 |1-1/3 | | | | | | | Averages | | | | | | --------------+----+-------+------+-------+------+>
+---------------------+-----------+> | | | | | No. of | | No. of Marks on | Sheets | Kind of Gun. | Face of Targets. | pierced. | --------------+---------------------+-----------+> | | | | |at 40 yds.|at 60 yds.| at 40 yds.| --------------+-----+---------------+-----+-----+> Muzzle-loader | 158 | 118| 68 | 60 | 28 | 33 | | | | | | | | " | 148 | 98| 52 | 65 | 28 | 22 | " | 116 | 129| 46 | 40 | 25 | 28 | Breech-loader | 144 | 90| 32 | 58 | 28 | 30 | " | 103 | 93| 60 | 62 | 24 | 31 | " | 132 | 93| 55 | 38 | 26 | 33 | Muzzle-loader | 117 | 71| 47 | 61 | 29 | 37 | Breech-loader | 65 | 135| 24 | 54 | 29 | 39 | Muzzle-loader | 113 | 113| 24 | 46 | 23 | 34 | | | | | | | | " | 106 | 103| 35 | 31 | 22 | 32 | Breech-loader | 95 | 105| 50 | 31 | 20 | 27 | " | 73 | 99| 22 | 42 | 30 | 40 | " | 97 | 95| 31 | 20 | 22 | 26 | " | 100 | 77| 32 | 28 | 33 | 25 | " | 88 | 91| 37 | 31 | 22 | 27 | " | 90 | 87| 20 | 28 | 20 | 31 | " | 60 | 48| 31 | 40 | 25 | 23 | |-----+----+-----+----+-----+-----+> Averages | 106 | 97| 33 | 43 | 26 | 30 | --------------+-----+----+-----+----+-----+-----+>
+-----------+--------+--------+---------+ | No. of |Total on| Tot’l | | | Shots | face |thro’gh | | | through | of 4 | 4 |Recoil in| Kind of Gun. | 20 sheets.|targets.|targets.| pounds. | --------------+-----------+--------+--------+---------+ | | | | | | at 60 yds.| | | | --------------+-----+-----+--------+--------+----+----+ Muzzle-loader | 5 | 2 | 399 | 68 | 68 | 62 | | | | | | | | " | 1 | 2 | 363 | 58 | 66 | 65 | " | 1 | 1 | 331 | 55 | 68 | 64 | Breech-loader | 0 | 2 | 324 | 60 |untested.| " | 2 | 4 | 318 | 61 | " | " | 2 | 3 | 318 | 64 | 70| 68 | Muzzle-loader | 4 | 8 | 296 | 78 |untested.| Breech-loader | 0 | 1 | 278 | 69 | 64| 62 | Muzzle-loader | 0 | 1 | 296 | 58 | 68| 68 | | | | | | | | " | 0 | 0 | 275 | 54 | 59| 61 | Breech-loader | 2 | 0 | 281 | 49 |untested.| " | 0 | 1 | 236 | 71 | 64| 66 | " | 0 | 0 | 243 | 48 | 65| 61 | " | 0 | 0 | 237 | 58 | 72| 69 | " | 2 | 1 | 247 | 52 | 76| 73 | " | 1 | 0 | 225 | 52 | 64| 68 | " | 0 | 0 | 179 | 48 | 74| 68 | |-----+-----+--------+--------+----+----+ Averages | 1 |1-1/2| 285 | 59 | 67| 66 | --------------+-----+-----+--------+--------+----+----+
+----+-------+------+-------+------+> | | | | | | | |Length |Weight|Charge |Charge| | | of | of | of | of | Kind of Gun. |Bore|Barrel.| Gun. |Powder.|Shot. | --------------+----+-------+------+-------+------+> | | | lb. | | | | | in. | oz. | drs. | oz. | --------------+----+-------+------+-------+------+> Muzzle loader | 15 | 30 | 6.14 | 2-3/4 |1-1/3 | " | 14 | 28-1/2| 6.11 | 2-1/4 |1-1/3 | " | 14 | 27 | 5.14 | 2-1/2 |1 | " | 16 | 31 | 6.12 | 2-1/2 |1 | " | 14 | 29 | 6.0 | 2-1/4 |1-1/3 | Breech-loader | 15 | 30 | 6.14 | 8 |1-1/4 | " | 15 | 29 | 6.8 | 8 |1-1/4 | Muzzle-loader | 14 | 29 | 6.4 | 2-3/4 |1-1/3 | Breech-loader | 15 | 30 | 7.0 | 8 |1 | Muzzle-loader | 14 | 30 | 7.0 | 2-3/4 |1 | " | 15 | 30-1/2| 6.8 | 2-3/4 |1-1/3 | Breech-loader | 15 | 28 | 6.4 | 2-3/4 |1-1/3 | | | | | | | Averages | | | | | | --------------+----+-------+------+-------+------+>
+---------------------+-----------+> | | | | | No. of | | No. of Marks on | Sheets | Kind of Gun. | Face of Targets. | pierced. | --------------+---------------------+-----------+> | | | | |at 40 yds.|at 60 yds.| at 40 yds.| --------------+-----+---------------+-----+-----+> Muzzle loader | 101 | 121| 48 | 55 | 38 | 22 | " | 147 | 85| 42 | 48 | 24 | 19 | " | 180 | 92| 30 | 60 | 25 | 27 | " | 122 | 86| 36 | 57 | 27 | 28 | " | 101 | 103| 30 | 55 | 21 | 25 | Breech-loader | 105 | 106| 63 | 26 | 29 | 33 | " | 129 | 57| 45 | 52 | 20 | 28 | Muzzle-loader | 99 | 99| 34 | 42 | 32 | 27 | Breech-loader | 77 | 100| 41 | 31 | 33 | 26 | Muzzle-loader | 71 | 92| 52 | 27 | 20 | 29 | " | 83 | 55| 44 | 24 | 28 | 29 | Breech-loader | 83 | 101| 34 | 7 | 18 | 28 | |-----+----+-----+----+-----+-----+> Averages | 104 | 92| 42 | 40 | 26 | 27 | --------------+-----+----+-----+----+-----+-----+>
+-----------+--------+--------+---------+ | No. of |Total on| Tot’l | | | Shots | face |thro’gh | | | through | of 4 | 4 |Recoil in| Kind of Gun. | 20 sheets.|targets.|targets.| pounds. | --------------+-----------+--------+--------+---------+ | | | | | | at 60 yds.| | | | --------------+-----+-----+--------+--------+----+----+ Muzzle loader | 8 | 5 | 325 | 68 | 63 | 58 | " | 0 | 0 | 322 | 48 | 53 | 54 | " | 2 | 0 | 312 | 54 | 65 | 63 | " | 2 | 0 | 301 | 57 | 64 | 62 | " | 0 | 1 | 289 | 47 | 60 | 44 | Breech-loader | 6 | 1 | 300 | 69 | 69 | 76 | " | 0 | 3 | 283 | 51 | 64 | 60 | Muzzle-loader | 0 | 8 | 274 | 67 | 68 | 74 | Breech-loader | 5 | 0 | 249 | 64 | 71 | 78 | Muzzle-loader | 0 | 0 | 242 | 49 | 69 | 64 | " | 5 | 0 | 206 | 62 | 68 | 67 | Breech-loader | 0 | 0 | 225 | 46 | 68 | 72 | |-----+-----+--------+--------+----+----+ Averages | 2 |1-1/2| 277 | 56 | 65 | 64 | --------------+-----+-----+--------+--------+----+----+
The guns were classified according to their weight. The breech-loaders, which used one quarter of a drachm more powder, showed about an equal recoil; the recoil differed surprisingly, ranging from 44 to 76 lbs., and was no indication of the power with which the shot was driven--a greater number of sheets being pierced where the recoil was under the average. The patterns produced by the muzzle-loaders varied from those of the breech-loaders less than they did from one another, and far less than that of one barrel differed from that of the other; in fact, the right-hand barrel seems to have shot much the best, and some of the guns that excelled at 40 yards fell far behindhand at 60 yards.
In penetration, which is a more valuable quality in a gun than even pattern, the breech-loaders took the lead; one pierced through 40 sheets and another through 39 sheets, so that the vaunted superiority of the old gun in this particular was found not to exist. It was further noted that a great improvement in this particular had taken place in the breech-loaders since the trial of the year previous, which improvement has been going on steadily since. The trial also proved that, although the breech-loaders required an extra amount of powder to give them force, it caused in them no additional recoil, and was objectionable in so far only as it entailed extra expense and weight of ammunition. The muzzle-loader was left, to offset its numerous inferiorities, nothing more than a claim to diminished weight of gun and ammunition, and a trifling saving in expense; in force and pattern it was equalled; in safety and handiness it was far surpassed by its competitor.
These trials were continued afterwards, but none were or could be more conclusive than the first which I have given, and there is no need of troubling the reader with them. Indeed, it would almost seem unnecessary to give time and space to the consideration of the superiorities of breech-loaders over muzzle-loaders at this day, so universally are the former accepted in the better informed localities, but in so extensive a country as ours, there are parts which are late to learn and hard to be convinced. To-day, while the muzzle-loader has nearly disappeared from the Northern and Eastern States, it still holds its own in the South and far West, and there are at present as many of them in service throughout the length and breadth of our land, as there are of breech-loaders.
One change that was early made in the cartridges was to do away with the pin and substitute a central fire, and so much was this change admired, that pin-fire guns have almost gone out of use. Nevertheless, I have never been convinced that this was any improvement, and believe, that if the pin-fire gun had come into general use before it was introduced, it would not have been accepted. However, admitted facts cannot be ignored, and to-day the pin-fire system has been almost as fully and far less intelligently relegated to the past, as the muzzle-loader itself. I am also no admirer of the snapaction, which has to a certain extent been substituted for the lever, on the ground that, while the lever never gets out of order, the spring of the snap often breaks. I may say, that no guns could have been more severely tried than mine that were manufactured by _Lefaucheux_, one of which was the second that was ever permanently used in this country, and that they have never given out in their working parts, while the oldest and most hardly used has never given out at all, although shot in all weathers and under very trying circumstances.
Indeed I go farther and insist that there have been no important improvements made in breech-loaders since the original _Lefaucheux_ pattern until the introduction of the hammerless guns. These are still imperfect, but they will probably be soon perfected, so that the last serious danger from a breech-loader will be removed, that of premature discharge in the field. Were it not for this discovery, it is my belief that sportsmen would yet give up the central-fire, and return to the pin-fire, there being no advantages in a central fire, while there are several disadvantages. The principal of these consists in the fact that no one can tell whether it is loaded or not, and a secondary danger lies in the loading of the cartridges, which has already cost several lives. As yet, however, the hammerless gun is not entirely safe. It is thrown back to full cock in opening, and when closed with a hard snap it will sometimes jar off. This happens very rarely, but often enough to make the gun dangerous.
It will foul about the working parts of the breech when it is used hard without cleaning, so that the springs will not act, and a premature discharge may follow, and it sometimes catches on the edge of the bent in the tumbler without slipping into it. As soon as these defects are absolutely remedied, the graceful and convenient hammerless gun will take the place of all others. I know very well it is claimed that these, and all other defects have been removed by the introduction of the safety block, which interposes before the tumbler, and thus between the strikers and the cap, and I do not intend to enter into an argument which would lead to no practical result. There are men ever ready to take certain risks in order to be ahead of their fellows. Let such disregard the advice, which common sense suggests, and make experiments, from which they cannot be dissuaded, and by which others may profit. I would, however, say that I am sustained in my objections by so high an authority, as “Stonehenge,” but am willing to admit that even as they are, I think a hammerless gun is safer than a central fire, for they avoid one of the greatest risks which the sportsman runs, that of the trigger catching on a twig as he is going through the bushes. Those who have used them sufficiently to get accustomed to them, say that they can shoot better with them than with the old gun, a fact which they attribute to the absence of the hammers.